It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The 911 WTC drone clip?!

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 10:15 AM
link   
If anything the KC-767 shown about 3/4 of the way down the page linked by the OP fits all the characteristics/appearance, and witness reports of what did hit the 2nd tower. That would be my first choice if I had to pick.

Looks grey to black in almost all the videos, no windows (again what many witnesses "first" reported.It's also able to carry more fuel explosives i.e "payload" . It'd be a decent "fill in" for the American Airlines plane, and perfect for the job.

Especially the bottom, and how there was all the specualtion on the differences of the bottom of the impact plane and a commercial AA planes.The KC-767 does have those wierd anomolies on the underside of the fuselage. I'm no plane expert,but maybe they are extra fuel tanks, as it is a military plane used for mid air refueling.

Interesting. I'm gonna look at more pictures of this KC-767, and compare them to the 2nd plane, videos.




posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by phushion
 

I too was able to stop the clip at 3 seconds, and you are correct, there doesn't appear to be a wing on top of the plane, as there should be, if the plane was tipped as it impacted the building. It appears to me that there could be a pair of wings angled down though.

Edit: After watching the short video and stopping it at several different times, it appears to not have much of a tail either. A nose cone also appears at the right side of the tower.


[edit on 3/20/2009 by saturnsrings]



posted on Mar, 20 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Nola213
 


United Airlines 767:




See how tiny the windows are? You can barely see them in this large picture. Also notice you almost can't see the windows in the back half of the plane at all because they're reflecting the sky and blending in with the paint of the fuselage. Now reduce the size of the picture to about the size you would see it flying in the sky, then add on top of that the plane was travelling at around 400-500mph and you won't see the windows.

Further, there was no "anomaly" on the bottom of the second plane. The "pod" has been debunked for many years and is considered disinfo. You can read about that here:

www.questionsquestions.net...



new topics
 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join